Attention all Knifemakers!.....Product dealers/retailers and/or knife makers/sharpeners/hobbyists (etc) are not permitted to insert business related text/videos/images (company/company name/product references) and/or links into your signature line, your homepage url (within the homepage profile box), within any posts, within your avatar, nor anywhere else on this site. Market research (such as asking questions regarding or referring to products/services that you make/offer for sale or posting pictures of finished projects) is prohibited. These features are reserved for supporting vendors and hobbyists.....Also, there is no need to announce to the community that you are a knifemaker unless you're trying to sell something so please refrain from sharing.
Thanks for your co-operation!

If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

I worked under a CMC for the '89-90 Championship seasons for the Detroit Pistons. We used to carve ice on the loading dock where Dennis Rodman would park his semi-cab covered with Christmas lights that he'd drive to work. Some how a gay BB player over 20 years later seems a bit......passe. OTOH Transgendered midget wresting with throwing knives sounds highly entertaining.
I think Lou Reed pretty much summed up my view on the entire topic with Sweet Jane long, long ago.

This strikes me as legal positivism in the extreme. It is one thing to believe that law is right because it is law, and quite another to believe that a decision is right because somebody in a position of power decided it. The first is questionable, and oft questioned, the second seems completely untenable. It may be that it was the right decision, but that needs to be evaluated on the merits of the issue, and not on the simple fact that it was decided.

State athletic commissions decide if someone is fit and qualified to be a licensed boxer/MMA fighter. Largely this is determined by a persons medical history and level of fitness. My point being, they are indeed in a position of authority to decide if a person is qualified or not be licensed as a fighter. As experts they evaluated Fallons medical history and her health and deemed her worthy of a MMA license.If there was any reason to deny her a license because of her gender reassignment surgery they would have done so. Clearly they are in a position of power because they know what they are doing, and are capable of evaluating a person in ways you and I couldnt. The only issue left here would be the problem some people may have with it.

State athletic commissions decide if someone is fit and qualified to be a licensed boxer/MMA fighter. Largely this is determined by a persons medical history and level of fitness. My point being, they are indeed in a position of authority to decide if a person is qualified or not be licensed as a fighter. As experts they evaluated Fallons medical history and her health and deemed her worthy of a MMA license.If there was any reason to deny her a license because of her gender reassignment surgery they would have done so. Clearly they are in a position of power because they know what they are doing, and are capable of evaluating a person in ways you and I couldnt. The only issue left here would be the problem some people may have with it.

I'm not sure you understand what I am talking about, so let me explain a little more clearly. There are people who believe that the rightness of a law is derived from its law-ness, or its being written down in the codes, and there are others who believe that the concepts behind the law need to be evaluated on their own merits, and that they have been posited is not enough to deem them right. In this case you are taking it a step further. You are going one step further. You are simply saying that it is right because they have decided, not that it is because they have decided. The latter part is clear, the former, that they know because they are experts and because they are experts they are right is much less clear. In your closing sentence you refer to "the problem" some people might have with it, which strikes me as half a step shy of calling everybody who does not agree with you a form of bigot. That's pretty weak. I think that letting her fight may be the right decision, but the other fighters comments, while extremely indelicate, do bring to light one interesting fact. It isn't that she has gone through a sex change operation, it is that she has somehow gotten to a place where she has circumvented the number one rule taught to little boys by our society today, and that is that you don't beat up on women. I'm not sure I understand how her gender realities interact with the experience of growing up nominally male and having the rules against hitting girls drummed in to your head happen.

So, to recapitulate, you want to arrogate an enormous amount of power, that of right and wrong as opposed to allowed and not allowed, simply because they hold a degree of political power and you want to cut off discussion of interesting issues of social norms rather than examine what is there. That is fine, but as I said in my earlier post, it is limiting and philosophically troubling.

I'll just sum up by saying that I find MMA to be barbaric and I think its legality is a strike against the concept that gaming commissions are doing their jobs.

I'll just sum up by saying that I find MMA to be barbaric and I think its legality is a strike against the concept that gaming commissions are doing their jobs.

Perhaps you aren't a bigot, just very very ignorant

Originally Posted by labor of love

My point being, they are indeed in a position of authority to decide if a person is qualified or not be licensed as a fighter. As experts they evaluated Fallons medical history and her health and deemed her worthy of a MMA license.

This assumes that Athletic Commissions know what they are doing when in relation to MMA it has been shown that most don't have a clue and don't know a thing about MMA. For a start look at the number of terrible judging decisions for evidence. I don't believe for a minute that any Athletic Commission has carried out any kind of detailed study to see the extent of Fox's gender reassignment and how it impacts on her fighting. Fighter safety is always talked about and surely this is a giant red flag

Mzer, your acessment of my position is so off base, I literally could not respond without writing a huge diatribe, except for the case in which you believe that Im calling someone here a bigot. Which I am not. For you to assume that is pretty weak. Yeah Steven Im sure state athletic commissions are a clusterf*** when it comes to MMA. But, I have no idea why you would think this is a "giant red flag".

Mzer, your acessment of my position is so off base, I literally could not respond without writing a huge diatribe, except for the case in which you believe that Im calling someone here a bigot. Which I am not. For you to assume that is pretty weak. Yeah Steven Im sure state athletic commissions are a clusterf*** when it comes to MMA. But, I have no idea why you would think this is a "giant red flag".

On a side note, did anybody bother to read the article I posted initially? I'm no authority on MMA and this subject is altogether still very new to me. My original point was to draw attention to the disparaging remarks made by joe rogan(giant douche),Matt Hughes and others toward Fallon fox. Not to argue the validity of her liscense or her fighting other women.